qaqcproc

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

1/13

Document Revision Date: September 23, 2005 Page 1 of 1

PREFACE

This manual was created for the purpose of improving the efficiency and accuracy of our planproduction process and to assist new staff in the area of personal development. Every project team

member will be given access to the manual. This document is a work-in-progress, continuallybeing refined. It will be the sole responsibility of each individual to review the manual and assure

they are aware of the most current information. All forms or checklists associated with this manual

are shown in the Appendices and are located on the server under each project directory and on theinternet. Any updates will be placed on the server and the internet and it is the individuals

responsibility to keep their manual current. This manual was put together by the

Design/Construction QA/QC committee. The committee consists of

Kent Evans, QA/QC ManagerCraig Aldridge

Jerry BallWayne Burcham

Gary Divis

Erika NunesMike Otte

Curt Weber

Anyone who feels that a change or revision to the manual is warranted is encouraged to bring the

issue up for discussion to the QA/QC committee and a determination will be made as to the

inclusion of said material.

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

2/13


INTRODUCTION

Checklists and other guidelines will be outlined to not only ensure a sound product but will assist in

personal development of staff. Everyone assigned to a project team will be expected to performcertain tasks on that project and will be responsible for fulfilling their responsibilities accurately and

efficiently. Asking questions, training and back-checking all work before it is reviewed by the

Project Manager is all part of Quality Control (QC).

Following the procedures, guidelines, and checklists in this manual will help to ensure Quality

Assurance (QA) at designated milestones. Although plans which are reviewed by the Project

Manager are reasonably accurate and complete, utilizing the policies and guidelines included in thismanual will assure a more orderly, comprehensive and accurate plan set. Due to numerous

circumstances, maintaining consistency from job to job is a major task. It is everyones

responsibility to follow the procedures herein and therefore be able to explain why he or she choosesotherwise. Only by strictly adhering to the QA/QC guidelines and standards can we continue to

improve the quality of our services to the community.

TECHNICAL RESPONSIBILITIES

Producing a clear and accurate set of plans is only half of our commitment to QA/QC. To fulfill the

commitment, QA/QC also needs to be carried out in electronic files and documents. Following

CADD Standards includes, but is not limited to items such as:

Making sure the correct text size and font are used in the Microstation files,

Entities are drawn correctly to comply with the use of Geopak,

Design features are drawn on the appropriate levels, and

Completion of summary of quantities sheets.

Following these standards will also improve the quality of plans and their readability when

reproduced from records.

Beyond the traditional responsibilities of each team member, there are a number of tasks and duties

that every individual should be expected to perform. Typical day to day tasks beyond data

management may include, record keeping, correspondence management, quality control andenforcement, personal development and interaction with public and private agencies including other

Public Works and Utilities departments, private utility companies and consultants. Although this

manual may not be all inclusive, it is intended to enhance each individuals overall capabilities.

PLAN REVIEW

Quality Control (QC) is vital to the success of the Engineering Services team. Each member of the

project team needs to understand their role and expected duties and display the initiative to stay

committed to providing a product that is consistent and accurate. Our goal as a team is to attainperfection in our plan sets. We can achieve this goal by learning from our previous experiences

through documentation. The documentation will be attained through a formal review process

(outlined below) that will utilize plan checklists for reviewing our plans prior to any submittal.

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

3/13


These checklists are available for each type of plan sheet (i.e. plan/profile, construction/removal,drainage, etc.) and give guidance on what should be completed at each submittal. The checklists are

shown in Appendix A. The refinement of these checklists will be an on-going process, as common

errors committed on projects will be incorporated into the checklists. The checklists are available onthe server in the specified project folder and on the internet.

Quality Assurance (QA) reviews by a QA/QC review team will be a part of every in-house project.Consultants are required in their scope of services to conduct their own QA/QC review prior to each

submittal. A project schedule will be developed for every project by the Project Manager and

distributed to every person on the project team. This schedule will include the major submittal dates

and the QA/QC review dates. These reviews will typically take place just before the:

1st Submittal

2nd

Submittal

Draft PS & E Submittal

PS & E Submittal

Typically, these reviews will be scheduled two weeks prior to a major submittal date. This willallow for up to one week for review and discussion and one week for redlines to be corrected and the

plans plotted for submittal. The Project Manager will be responsible for enforcing the timelines toassure that the quality reviews take place.

Quality Assurance (QA) Review Process: A project team (any Designers and Project Managers) and a QA review team (a three person

panel assigned by the QA/QC Manager) will be assigned at the start of a new project.

The Designer will submit plans to the QA review team two weeks prior to the majorsubmittal dates.

The QA review team will use the appropriate checklists to document (redline) all comments,

questions and errors caught during the review. After the initial review, the QA/QC review team and the project team will meet to discuss the

review comments.

The Designers will then have one week to make any necessary corrections prior to submittingthe plans to the Project Manager for the PW&U Plan Review Group review.

The documentation of the review will then be filed in the project file and also in a separate

file that will contain checklists from all of the in-house QA/QC project reviews. This filewill be evaluated periodically by the QA/QC committee and a list will be formed that

documents common errors committed by the project teams.

To re-enforce Engineering Services commitment to QA/QC, everyone is responsible for back-

checking his/her work before it is given to the PM for their review. Design team members will usethe checklists provided on the server as a reference tool when working on projects. The appropriate

checklists must be filled out by the Designers and included with each submittal as well as theredlined plans from the previous submittal. This will help those on the PW & U Plan Review Group

to know what they should be looking for and what may not be included yet.

Once a project has been submitted to the Project Manager, the Project Manager will then send a To-

Do to the PW&U Plan Review Group to notify them that the plans, checklists, cost estimate and any

special provisions are available for review. The To-Do should include the following information:

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

4/13


Name of Project

Project Number

Project Description

What Submittal it is

Deadline for Reviews

Key Components of the Project

Each person on the Plan Review Group will be responsible for responding to the To-Do to indicate

they know the plans are available for review. If it is not appropriate for an individual to review a

particular set of plans, it is the individuals responsibility to decline the To-Do. If it is appropriatefor the individual to review the plans, then they should accept the To-Do and mark the To-Do

completed when they have finished their review. If a Reviewer accepts a To-Do and then finds they

are unable to complete it, they should change their response to decline rather than sending a noticethat they have completed the review.

A Plan Review Checkout Sheet should also be filled out by the Project Manager and posted

directly above where the plans are located on the review shelf. The Plan Review Checkout Sheetis shown in Appendix B. Each Reviewer is responsible for initialing and dating the checkout sheet

when they begin their review and when they have finished their review. The Plan ReviewChecklists should be used as a guide when reviewing plans to inform the Reviewer of what is

expected at each submittal. When the review period is over, the Project Manager will compile all

comments using the Plan Review Summary Sheet, found in Appendix C. A meeting will then be

held with the Designers or Consultant to discuss the comments from the review. The Designers orConsultant will then have one week to complete the Response section of the Plan Review

Summary Sheet with how they plan to address the comment and return it to the Project Manager. Ifeither party disagrees on how to address the comment, then the Project Manager needs to discuss the

issue with the appropriate City personnel, including the person who made the comment, to resolve

the issue. The Project Manager will then be responsible for noting the Final Action taken andreturning a copy of the summary sheet to the Designers or Consultant. A copy of the completed

summary sheet should be included in the next submittal to enable Reviewers to see how their

comments were addressed.

REDLINE PROCESS

One way to ensure a quality set of plans is to double check that all changes or corrections have been

addressed. As previously mentioned, every project has several milestones; a First, Second, Draft

PS & E, and PS & E submittal. Due to changes in design policy, unforeseen complications, internal

or external influences, projects are constantly being changed and updated. The job of the Revieweris to provide constructive feedback to help the Designer achieve the Citys goal of providing quality

plans. If an error is found or if the Reviewer has a design question, they should make a detailedcomment so that their concern is clear to the Designer. All comments should be made in ink and

initialed so that the Designer knows who to talk to if further discussion is needed. When a Reviewer

has completed their review, they need to initial and date the check out sheet. Making sure thesechanges are made and knowing which sheets will need to be revised is critical to putting out an error

free product.

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

5/13


Once a redline has been corrected, it should be crossed off with a highlighter to help verify that allredlines have been addressed. If the Designer has a question about any revision, they need to follow

up by asking the Project Manager for clarification before that comment is crossed off. Even after

making sure that you have completed all redlines by highlighting them off, it is the responsibilityof that individual to back check their work. This is to be done before taking it to the Project

Manager for their review. Only by following these guidelines can we assure that all revisions are

accurate and have been performed in an efficient manner to protect against any potential oversights.

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

6/13


Appendix A

PLAN REVIEW CHECKLISTS

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

7/13


CROSS SECTIONS SHEETPLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST

EXAMPLE SUBMITTAL: DATE:

DESIGN FIRM / DESIGNER:PROJECT NAME:

DESIGN MANAGER:

PROJECT NUMBER: CITY PROJECT MANAGER:QA/QC REVIEWER:

WORK COMPLETED

FIRST SUBMITTAL TASKS YES NOON

GOINGNA

SUBMITTER OR DESIGNERCOMMENTS

File name and plotting informationDrawing number

Sheet name in lower right cornerCity of Lincoln sheet border

Title Block filled outRound "Preliminary Plan - Not Final -Subject to Change" stamp

Shown at 25-foot intervals and at locationsas necessary to accurately depict the lay ofthe land, analyze drainage, show drivewaygrades and compute earthwork quantities

Stations shownStreet name labeledCut/Fill/Overexcavation areas shown

Hinge point/catch point data shownExisting ground elevation shown

Proposed ground elevation shownExisting ground line shown

Proposed ground surfacing shownExisting Right-of-Way line and easements

shownExisting Utilities shown

SECOND SUBMITTAL TASKSUpdate and check all tasks under FirstSubmittalRound "Preliminary Plan - Not Final -Subject to Change" stampProposed Right-of-Way line and easementsshownProposed Utilities shown

Pertinent Geotechnical info shown

DRAFT PS&E SUBMITTAL TASKSUpdate and check all tasks under SecondSubmittal

Preliminary stamp replaced by ProfessionalEngineer's Seal

PS&E SUBMITTAL TASKSUpdate and check all tasks under DraftPS&E Submittal

Professional Engineer's Seal has beenSigned and Dated

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

8/13


Appendix B

PLAN REVIEW CHECKOUT SHEET

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

9/13


REVIEW DATES:

Begin:[Begin Date] End:[End Date]PLAN REVIEW

CHECK OUT SHEET

EXAMPLE SUBMITTAL:[Select Submittal]

DATE RECEIVED:

[Date Received]

PROJECT NAME:[Project Name]

PROJECT NUMBER:

[Project #]PROJECT MANAGER:

[Select Project Mngr]

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Grading Storm Drainage WastewaterWater Paving Lighting

Traffic Signals Landscaping MarkingsSigning Erosion Control Misc:

Check OutDATE / INITIALS

Check InDATE / INITIALS

Check OutDATE / INITIALS

Check InDATE / INITIALS

Management Survey

Figard, Roger A / / Bartek, Rick W / /

Hoskins, Randy W / / Edson, Ron G / /

Shafer, Thomas S / / Traffic Operations

Design / Construction Bartels, Dennis D / /

Aldridge, Craig E / / Bernt, Dave G / /

Burcham, Wayne L / / Blahak, Chad E / /

Ball, Jerry L / / Huff, Jim D / /

Dittmann, Brian K / / Jochum, Larry L / /

Divis, Gary J / / Kroos, Harry B / /

Duensing, Larry G / / Lee, Al K / /

Evans, Kent E / / Opfer, Scott A / /

Faust, Steven R / / Powell, Doug W / /

Humphrey, Kristen A / / Rathjen, Dave E / /

Lionberger, Holly / / Sieckmeyer, Kelly K / /

Nunes, Erika L / / Singh, Virendra A / /

Otte, Michael S / / Sokolik, Erin E / /

Sweney, Bruce W / / Tompsett, Jim L / /

Weber, Curt A / / Wastewater

Wilcox, Charles D / / Kramer, Brian A / /

Wondercheck, Warren / / Mandery, Michael A / /

Lab Water

Hassler, Dan P / / McElvain, Nick W / /

Maintenance Owen, Steve R / /

Nass, Bill L / / Watershed Management

Planning Biesecker, Devin L / /

Cary, David R / / Callen, John / /

Records / /

Pratt, Tim H / /

Titus, Steve J / /

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

10/13


Appendix C

PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY SHEET

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

11/13


CODES:A. ACCEPT COMMENT WILL BE CORB. DESIGNER WILL EVALUATEC. DELETE COMMENT (MUST PROVID

PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY SHEET

EXAMPLESUBMITTAL:

[Select Submittal]

PROJECT NAME:[Project Name]

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:Grading Storm DrainWater Paving Traffic Signals LandscapingSigning Erosion Con

PROJECT NUMBER:

[Project #]CITY PROJECT MANAGER:

[Select Project Mngr]DESIGN FIRM:

[Engineering Services]

SHEETNO.ITEM

NO.CODE

CONCERN

1

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

2

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

3

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

4

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

5

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

12/13


6

[Code]

COMMENT:

RESPONSE:

8/14/2019 qaqcproc

13/13


Documents

qaqcproc